|
Not a question of neccessary so much as somewhat overated IMHO. Like the shotgun, it encourages a "Point and Pull" mentality which careful analysis of usually reveals its ineffectiveness. In WWII the Soviets issued their PPSh M1941 (selective fire) and PPS M9143 (full auto only) in huge humbers, their tactical doctrine was that their short ranged encouraged aggresivness and it was easier to rush recruits through training. Some of us who served Across The Pond thought allowing the soldier to use his M-16 on full auto compensated for that round's relative ineffectiveness and it often seemed the main function of riflemen was to point out targets for M-60 gunners. WWI ended before John. T. Thompson's concept of a "trench broom" could really be tested, in the Wehrmacht initially the SMG was the NCO's weapon, rather like the officer's pistol, as much a badge of rank and more for defensive purposes to he could concentrate on leading his troops.
|